Taxi Driver Online :: View topic - Jacobs

Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacob will state that there is NO unmet demand!
Can anyone else confirm this??
If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see what Garry et al do next.

Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacobs will state that there is NO unmet demand!
Can anyone else confirm this??
If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see what Garry et al do next.

Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacobs will state that there is NO unmet demand!

Pay attention folks.

Edinburgh is the area, and it appears that the report will conclude no SUD.

See related threads, longwinded and vitriolic as they are, under the restricted numbers section.

mike wrote:

I don't think anyone on TDO really thought Jacobs would find any unmet demand. They have a Track record to maintain because nearly all their surveys have produced the same result. The only one that did surprise me was Chorley where they found enough unmet demand for 7 vehicles.
They found none in Liverpool who have 1417 cabs so its hardly surprising they found none in Edinburgh. Having said that I suppose we will all have to wait until the information is out in the public domain.

Regards

JD

I think I have said this before about Jacobs but just for the record.

The Jacobs Report states that there is “no unmet demand” for taxis Services in Edinburgh. The Report was initiated because of the taxi monitors report last year in which he stated that the “increase in PHC was indicative of a latent unmet demand for taxi services”. The taxi monitor even stated that this was written into English case law and that the Scottish Executive would include the same criteria to ascertain the demand for taxi services. When the SUD went out to tender the Council once again stated that the Ph had doubled in the last 3 years but any mention of it was omitted from the survey criteria.

The Jacobs Report was then carried out in May/June 05 and a draft report was provided at the time of our legal case.

The draft report in no way shape or form takes into account the increase in PHC and the indicative latent unmet demand for taxi services.

In other words it’s a carve up.

Knowing what you know can anyone guess as to what our next course of action might be in the event our licence applications are denied, remembering that there are 35 applicants and 110 on the list of interested parties?

I might also add that I have the list of the 110.

What would you do to blow the game wide open for everyone and take the power away from the council across the board?

Any suggestions?
:badgrin:

So on what grounds would the survey have suited you?

Watch the papers, the Jacobs Report is under attack.

Judicial Revue? :badgrin:

Author:	Guest [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 12:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Jacobs - NO Unmet Demand!
Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacobs will state that there is NO unmet demand! Can anyone else confirm this?? If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see what Garry et al do next.

Author:	Sirius [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 12:33 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jacobs - NO Unmet Demand!
mike wrote: Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacob will state that there is NO unmet demand! Can anyone else confirm this?? If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see what Garry et al do next. When is the report to be published?

Author:	steveo [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:28 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jacobs - NO Unmet Demand!
mike wrote: Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacobs will state that there is NO unmet demand! Can anyone else confirm this?? If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see what Garry et al do next. what area?

Author:	NF [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:04 pm ]
Post subject:
Pay attention folks. Edinburgh is the area, and it appears that the report will conclude no SUD. See related threads, longwinded and vitriolic as they are, under the restricted numbers section.

Author:	Sussex [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 5:55 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jacobs - NO Unmet Demand!
mike wrote: Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacobs will state that there is NO unmet demand! I would frankly be amazed if Jacobs ever come out with a report that does show SUD. In the few reports that I've read that they have done they don't even define what they mean by SUD. So how the f*** can they find something if they don't know what they are looking for? I wonder how close the Jacob's report will be to the draft proposals from the DfT, which the Scottish Office could well mirror? Will Jacobs report cover anything like; * the length of time that would-be customers have to wait at ranks. However, this alone is an inadequate indicator of demand; also taken into account should be... * waiting times for street hailings and for telephone bookings. But waiting times at ranks or elsewhere do not in themselves satisfactorily resolve the question of unmet demand. It is also desirable to address... * latent demand, for example people who have responded to long waiting times by not even trying to travel by taxi. This can be assessed by surveys of people who do not use taxis, perhaps using stated preference survey techniques. * peaked demand. It is sometimes argued that delays associated only with peaks in demand (such as morning and evening rush hours, or pub closing times) are not 'significant' for the purpose of the Transport Act 1985. The Department does not share that view. Since the peaks in demand are by definition the most popular times for consumers to use taxis, it can be strongly argued that unmet demand at these times is significant. Local authorities should consider when the peaks occur and who is being disadvantaged through restrictions on provision of taxi services. * consultation. As well as statistical surveys, assessment of quantity restrictions should include consultation with all those concerned, including user groups (which should include groups representing people with disabilities, and people such as students or women), the police, hoteliers, operators of pubs and clubs and visitor attractions, and providers of other transport modes (such as train operators, who want taxis available to take passengers to and from stations); * publication. All the evidence gathered in a survey should be published, together with an explanation of what conclusions have been drawn from it and why. If quantity restrictions are to be continued, their benefits to consumers and the reason for the particular level at which the number is set should be set out. * financing of surveys. It is not good practice for surveys to be paid for by the local taxi trade (except through general revenues from licence fees). To do so can call in question the impartiality and objectivity of the survey process. Methinks the Jacobs report will be no-where near as detailed as what is going to be needed to stand up in court. But I will look forward to reading it.

Taxi Driver Online http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Jacobs - NO Unmet Demand! http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2330	Page 1 of 3

Author:	TDO [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:23 pm ]
Post subject:
NF wrote: Pay attention folks. Edinburgh is the area, and it appears that the report will conclude no SUD. See related threads, longwinded and vitriolic as they are, under the restricted numbers section. Well the result of the Jacobs survey is hardly surprising, since as TDO has argued consistently, these surveys effectively endorse the status quo, and never find much in the way of SUD. SUD might have been found if there was no PH, but the PH sector has just grown to meet growth in the market.

Author:	JD [ Thu Aug 04, 2005 9:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jacobs - NO Unmet Demand!
mike wrote: Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacobs will state that there is NO unmet demand! Can anyone else confirm this?? If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see what Garry et al do next. I don't think anyone on TDO really thought Jacobs would find any unmet demand. They have a Track record to maintain because nearly all their surveys have produced the same result. The only one that did surprise me was Chorley where they found enough unmet demand for 7 vehicles. They found none in Liverpool who have 1417 cabs so its hardly surprising they found none in Edinburgh. Having said that I suppose we will all have to wait until the information is out in the public domain. Regards JD

Author:	jimbo [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 8:51 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jacobs - NO Unmet Demand!
JD wrote: mike wrote: Have just heard from a reliable source close to the council that Jacobs will state that there is NO unmet demand! Can anyone else confirm this?? If this is the case, it will be very interesting to see what Garry et al do next. I don't think anyone on TDO really thought Jacobs would find any unmet demand. They have a Track record to maintain because nearly all their surveys have produced the same result. The only one that did surprise me was Chorley where they found enough unmet demand for 7 vehicles. They found none in Liverpool who have 1417 cabs so its hardly surprising they found none in Edinburgh. Having said that I suppose we will all have to wait until the information is out in the public domain. Regards JD It's the latent demand. Still better latent than never.

Author:	Skull [ Sat Aug 20, 2005 2:27 pm ]
Post subject:
I think I have said this before about Jacobs but just for the record. The Jacobs Report states that there is “no unmet demand” for taxis Services in Edinburgh. The Report was initiated because of the taxi monitors report last year in which he stated that the “increase in PHC was indicative of a latent unmet demand for taxi services”. The taxi monitor even stated that this was written into English case law and that the Scottish Executive would include the same criteria to ascertain the demand for taxi services. When the SUD went out to tender the Council once again stated that the Ph had doubled in the last 3 years but any mention of it was omitted from the survey criteria. The Jacobs Report was then carried out in May/June 05 and a draft report was provided at the time of our legal case. The draft report in no way shape or form takes into account the increase in PHC and the indicative latent unmet demand for taxi services. In other words it’s a carve up. Knowing what you know can anyone guess as to what our next course of action might be in the event our licence applications are denied, remembering that there are 35 applicants and 110 on the list of interested parties? I might also add that I have the list of the 110. What would you do to blow the game wide open for everyone and take the power away from the council across the board? Any suggestions?

Author:	RealCabforce [ Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:46 pm ]
Post subject:
Skull wrote: I think I have said this before about Jacobs but just for the record. The Jacobs Report states that there is “no unmet demand” for taxis Services in Edinburgh. The Report was initiated because of the taxi monitors report last year in which he stated that the “increase in PHC was indicative of a latent unmet demand for taxi services”. The taxi monitor even stated that this was written into English case law and that the Scottish Executive would include the same criteria to ascertain the demand for taxi services. When the SUD went out to tender the Council once again stated that the Ph had doubled in the last 3 years but any mention of it was omitted from the survey criteria. The Jacobs Report was then carried out in May/June 05 and a draft report was provided at the time of our legal case. The draft report in no way shape or form takes into account the increase in PHC and the indicative latent unmet demand for taxi services. In other words it’s a carve up. Knowing what you know can anyone guess as to what our next course of action might be in the event our licence applications are denied, remembering that there are 35 applicants and 110 on the list of interested parties? I might also add that I have the list of the 110. What would you do to blow the game wide open for everyone and take the power away from the council across the board? Any suggestions? Sad that you choose to be selective in your quotes and misquotes. The taxi monitor's report for May2004 states (my emphasis) "Growth in the number of private hire cars may be indicative of a latent demand for taxis. The Council may therefore, in light of the above, consider commissioning a further independent survey to assess demand for taxis in the city." This differs from your claim. The term "latent demand" is also ridiculous, since how can anyone prove "latent demand?" One could survey non-taxi users and ask if they would use taxis if more were available, but that would entail entering a minefield of where, when and hows. Although skull continues to hint at further action, he should, by now, be well aware that, contrary to his opinion, he has not the support he wants. Instead, all he seeks now is revenge on a council he hates and death to the taxi trade who did not support him in his selfish quest. When he wakens up, he will realise that he can achieve neither target, but will be consigned to oblivion, like countless other fools before him. Interesting to note the absence of opinion from the lamentable Jim Taylor - once a stalwart supporter of these "gay cavaliers"

Author:	Skull [ Sun Aug 21, 2005 6:18 am ]
Post subject:
Latent demand or undeveloped demand, take your pick asshole it is one in the same thing? If you don’t get the chance to develop it how do you know that it exists, that’s why the demand is latent? Some would call it a free market, a market subject to costs, price and quality of service. The PHC have no problem developing this latent demand, if they can’t develop it by targeting the new work they target your existing work or haven’t you noticed. As for “may be indicative of a latent demand for taxis” have a look around their market share is expanding your market share is contracting. (Lots of those nice new Mercedes Vitos running around these days, you know, the ones with 8 seats) The PHC fleet has doubled in the last 3 years yet you claim there is no unmet demand, and when they top a 1000 in the next 3 years will you still be claiming the same thing? You know RealCabforce, I would like to have the satisfaction of kicking your head in and not because of the mindless gratuitous violence of the act but just to see if you noticed? I don’t think I could beat you to a greater degree than you do by waking up every morning to your own ignorance. Oblivion is a state of mind reserved for those who have no greater an existence than in the pseudonym they hide behind. The lamentable Jim Taylor as you put it is working on something that will take our case forward as we speak. Now back to the question, but let me make it simple for you. What is the one thing that takes away the power of the establishment in this country leaving them with no recourse for appeal?

Author:	187ums [ Mon Aug 22, 2005 12:07 am ]
Post subject:
So on what grounds would the survey have suited you?

Author:	Skull [ Mon Aug 22, 2005 5:27 am ]
Post subject:
187ums wrote: So on what grounds would the survey have suited you? If the Council needed grounds to initiate a survey I would have thought the increase in the PHC would have been as good a place to start as any but then to leave the Ph out of the SUD altogether is somewhat stretching the truth a little don’t you think? If there is indeed “no unmet demand” someone better inform the Ph that there is no point increasing their fleet to meet a demand which does not exist. I am sure they will be disappointed to find out that this is in fact the case. As for grounds that would have suited me there are none. The SUD has been nothing more than political fix for long enough and the Council know it. You don’t have to be a Rocket Scientist to see who is meeting the demand in Edinburgh.

Author:	Skull [ Fri Sep 02, 2005 4:09 pm ]
Post subject:
Watch the papers, the Jacobs Report is under attack. Judicial Revue?

Page 1 of 3	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Sussex [ Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:41 pm ]
Post subject:
Skull wrote: Watch the papers, the Jacobs Report is under attack. Judicial Revue? I haven't seen, or can't be bothered to see it, but do they actually define what they believe to be SUD in it?